From Adjudication to Facilitation: How Arbitration Strengthened My Mediation Practice

Mon, Aug 18th, 2025 | by Miles Mediation and Arbitration | Article | Social Share

As a Florida-based attorney and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) professional, I have had the privilege of serving as both an arbitrator and a mediator in a wide array of matters — from complex commercial disagreements to sensitive employment and workplace disputes. Yet I’ve found that many neutrals do not do both mediation and arbitration; some choose to mediate instead of arbitrating, and others solely focus on arbitration ADR professionals often prefer one or the other, but I have found it valuable to have an ADR practice where I do both.

While arbitration and mediation are inherently different in structure and purpose, my experience as an arbitrator has become a vital asset to my work as a mediator. It has equipped me with not only legal and procedural acumen but also with deeper insight into how parties evaluate risk, process conflict, and ultimately, resolve their disputes.

The practical synergies between arbitration and mediation are markedly salient. Here is a closer look at how the rigor of arbitration has shaped my approach to mediation, particularly in Florida’s dynamic legal landscape.

Clarifying the Distinction

Arbitration is an adjudicative process where a neutral third party renders a binding decision, often governed by institutional rules or contractual terms. Mediation, by contrast, is non-binding and collaborative, designed to empower parties to reach their own resolution with the support of a neutral facilitator. In both settings, neutrality and preparation are essential, but the mediator must create space for self-determination rather than issue rulings.

Understanding of Legal and Evidentiary Tools

My arbitration experience has honed my ability to analyze legal issues, assess evidentiary weight, and understand how decision-makers reason through complex cases. In mediation, this doesn’t translate into providing legal advice, but rather into asking the right questions and prompting parties to realistically evaluate their own arguments. I have found that parties often appreciate — and expect — a mediator who can track legal nuances without becoming directive.

Neutrality as a Shared Cornerstone

Arbitrators are held to the highest standards of impartiality, and that same expectation carries over into mediation. When parties trust that I do not favor one side, they are more likely to engage openly in the process. The discipline of maintaining neutrality in arbitration has only strengthened my ability to hold space for divergent perspectives in mediation.

More Efficient Process and Structure

In arbitration, process is paramount — scheduling, discovery, briefing, and final awards must follow timelines and procedural rules. I bring this same respect for structure into mediation. Clarity around the process contributes significantly to outcomes, particularly in high-conflict or multi-party matters. Clients in Florida’s busy employment litigation environment often value a mediator who can keep discussions productive and focused while remaining flexible to the needs of the parties.

More Credibility with Clients

One of the most tangible benefits of serving as an arbitrator is the credibility it lends to in the eyes of attorneys. When counsel recognize that I understand the demands of evidentiary proof, burdens of persuasion, and judicial discretion, they are more inclined to allow their clients to engage candidly in the mediation process. This credibility enhances my ability to assist parties in evaluating risk and in considering the practical implications of continuing litigation.

Enhanced Risk Assessment and Decision-making

In arbitration, I have seen well-prepared cases falter due to unexpected procedural twists or evidentiary challenges. These experiences have made me especially attuned to the uncertainty of litigation. In mediation, I use this awareness to help parties understand the range of potential outcomes they may face, and how a negotiated resolution, while not perfect, may serve their broader interests more effectively despite their otherwise entrenched positions.

Improved Handling of Emotions and Conflict

Florida is home to diverse industries, cultures, and personalities. Whether mediating employment disputes, business dissolutions, or intra-organizational conflicts, emotional dynamics can significantly affect resolution. My arbitration background has helped me stay calm under pressure and to support parties through emotionally complex discussions with empathy and professionalism.

Enhanced Communication and Listening

The ability to communicate clearly and listen attentively is indispensable in both arbitration and mediation. Arbitration sharpened my focus on precision and clarity, while mediation deepened my appreciation for nonverbal cues and emotional subtext. I aim to blend both styles — concise communication with active, empathetic listening — to help parties feel understood and empowered to problem-solve.

Facilitation of Creative Solutions

While arbitration often ends in a win-lose decision, mediation offers an opportunity to craft outcomes tailored to each party’s needs. I encourage parties to consider interests beyond legal claims — such as the cost to business, preserving business relationships or reputational interests — when exploring solutions. This flexibility often results in more durable and meaningful resolutions.

Opportunity for Growth in Both Roles

Florida’s legal and regulatory environment continues to evolve, especially in areas like employment law, non-competes, contracts, and regulatory compliance. For Florida’s legal professionals and business leaders navigating a rapidly changing dispute landscape, this dual perspective offers both strategic and human advantages. The lessons from arbitration continue to inform my commitment to principled, practical, and people-centered resolution. Staying active as both an arbitrator and mediator keeps me informed and adaptive. I routinely engage in continuing education and professional dialogue to sharpen my practice.

While I recognize that some neutrals prefer to choose only one ADR option, my arbitration experience has provided me with invaluable tools and insights that directly enhance my mediation work. The ability to analyze complex issues, manage structured processes, and maintain impartiality under pressure has made me a more effective and trusted neutral. More importantly, it has reinforced my belief that the best outcomes often come not from rulings, but from conversations — when people are given the opportunity to be heard, to reflect, and to choose their own resolution.

About Lori Adelson

Lori G. Adelson is a highly respected Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator and Qualified Arbitrator who focuses on resolving complex business/commercial and employment disputes through mediation and arbitration. With 25 years of legal experience, she brings a deep understanding of the law and a practical, problem-solving approach to every case.